If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Re: Granger - Turner

The production similarity is damning because it was supposed to be better. They didn't risk chemistry and fanbase issues for "exactly the same". If the production is a matter of the situation then you just keep Granger because he can defend the post better than Paul and is twice the defender ET is, and you live with the offensive numbers.

For the ET deal to be a success his production, especially scoring, must be a substantial improvement. So far the 2 "swing for the fence" deals have gone tilt.

I do like that ET has had the better FG% but it really sucks not having the 3pt threat. The issue was that DG hadn't gotten dialed in from 3 either.

The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Naptown_Seth For This Useful Post:

Re: Granger - Turner

The production's a wash. My viewing experience is not. I ****ing HATE watching Turner play basketball, the dude is terrible. I'll take Danny playing adequate defense and launching the occasional ill advised transition 3 over Turner getting completely obliterated by the slightest screen and the majority of his shots being guarded fadeaway turnarounds from 12 feet.

I'm completely serious, Evan Turner's not an NBA basketball player, not one worth a **** on a winning team anyway. He's dreadful, there is absolutely no reason for him to get minutes over any of Butler, Cope, or Solo, in order.

Re: Granger - Turner

Granger could return to the Indiana Pacers and you would find that his production would be the same as the day he left. Evan Turner averaged over 17ppg for the Sixers and the same is true for him. His numbers are down with the Pacers as well.

The fact is, our offense is a big part of the reason you see this.

I dunno about that first statement, but I absolutely aggree with the second part of your post about our offense really being C-R-A-P.

Btw are you ready to atleast admit that Danny isn't broken or something? I mean seriously the way some of you talked about him just two months after coming back from a long absence due to a hefty injury made it sound like he would NEVER be able to actually play anymore.

Re: Granger - Turner

The production's a wash. My viewing experience is not. I ****ing HATE watching Turner play basketball, the dude is terrible. I'll take Danny playing adequate defense and launching the occasional ill advised transition 3 over Turner getting completely obliterated by the slightest screen and the majority of his shots being guarded fadeaway turnarounds from 12 feet.

I'm completely serious, Evan Turner's not an NBA basketball player, not one worth a **** on a winning team anyway. He's dreadful, there is absolutely no reason for him to get minutes over any of Butler, Cope, or Solo, in order.

Well that's a little strongly worded, but his defensive positioning and staying with his man is . I can see he tries, but my god. I think it says a lot when a 30 year old supposedly "done" and "brokendown" player who wasn't known for his athleticism in the first place is superior defensively to a 25 year old player who has much better athleticism and a lot of the physical attributes to be a good defensive player and is in the prime of his (bball)life.

I also have to say that his drives into the lane seem pretty good, but his court awareness and ability to carefully pass the ball are definitely negatives IMHO. I knew he didn't have the best court awareness, but I did expect him to be a better passer, but maybe that's due to still finding his role and his part in our team. I honestly don't know.

I was always pretty sure that Danny would have become better during the season, with ups and downs, slowly getting back into form after his injury and I hope Turner will be able to round more into form aswell, because I think we are going to need him too IF we want to take the next step during the postseason.

Re: Granger - Turner

I think this shows that Granger was not the problem. The Pacers' offense was, and is still the problem.

I aggree though we can't forget that Danny was shooting pretty badly from downtown. I had no doubt that his threepoint shooting would improve over the next months to at the very least be a reliable option, but I guess Bird was less sure of that.

Re: Granger - Turner

ET can't help Paul guard some of the bigger 3s like Danny could. ETs defense it not good, Danny's was inconsistent but better. To me that's the big difference. If they can find a niche for ET to be a creator/scorer he can be effective otherwise I feel like he's a detriment to the overall unit on the floor. Danny could be invisible, but rarely did he hurt the team.

Someone earlier in the thread had it right, ET can be part of the offensive flow problems. Danny could be a non factor, but rarely was he a ball stopper or get beat horribly on defense.

To be honest, I'm not sure the trade is that big a factor on the struggles they are having now, but I do believe it didn't help anything at all. At least yet.

Re: Granger - Turner

The production's a wash. My viewing experience is not. I ****ing HATE watching Turner play basketball, the dude is terrible. I'll take Danny playing adequate defense and launching the occasional ill advised transition 3 over Turner getting completely obliterated by the slightest screen and the majority of his shots being guarded fadeaway turnarounds from 12 feet.

I'm completely serious, Evan Turner's not an NBA basketball player, not one worth a **** on a winning team anyway. He's dreadful, there is absolutely no reason for him to get minutes over any of Butler, Cope, or Solo, in order.

I almost always agree with Heisenberg and I do here too.

I'm at 75-85 percent of this post... to that degree. I agree with the sentiment though for sure. I'm shocked at how much I misjudged ETs game. Always be ware of good players on bad team, I guess. I get sucked in everytime.

I'm just not sure who he can guard at the NBA level. 2s are too quick, hell 3s are too quick and tall. His foot speed is terrible. Maybe it'll turn around. I wonder if they can improve his side to side/quickness through some targetted training. I want to like him, I want him to help the team be better. I'm just seeing the opposite. Not that Danny was the answer, but ET hasn't been either, not even close, so far.

Re: Granger - Turner

The production similarity is damning because it was supposed to be better. They didn't risk chemistry and fanbase issues for "exactly the same". If the production is a matter of the situation then you just keep Granger because he can defend the post better than Paul and is twice the defender ET is, and you live with the offensive numbers.

For the ET deal to be a success his production, especially scoring, must be a substantial improvement. So far the 2 "swing for the fence" deals have gone tilt.

I do like that ET has had the better FG% but it really sucks not having the 3pt threat. The issue was that DG hadn't gotten dialed in from 3 either.

Good to see you get some camera time at the Memphis game Seth, and props to PD on air.

The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to DJVendetta For This Useful Post:

Re: Granger - Turner

Turner can score. Problem is, he's only been featured in line lineups with Sloan. When he got here, I think his first game was the only game he came off the bench with CJ. Then Hill got hurt, so he came off the bench with Sloan. Then Watson got hurt, and so he ended up coming off the bench with Sloan - again. I think when CJ gets back, and Turner can move back to being primarily a scorer, we'll see what he can really do. We've already seen flashes of it vs Charlotte and Boston.

Re: Granger - Turner

Have you watched DG play with the Clippers? Yes he is playing in an up-tempo system and with a PG that delivers the ball, but they are using him off screens, and in post up situations. They are calling plays for him that aren't much different than what we ran for him here. He's finally got his legs under him, and he's making the most of his opportunities.

The facts are, Danny was obviously misused here and wasn't quite dead as many posters suggested. Maybe he got off to a slow start here, and has just picked it up in LA, but don't discredit the fact that he's playing well because he's playing with players who get him the ball in position to score. I mean what the hell is Doc Rivers doing getting Danny some open looks?!? Ohh the tragedy

Man you must want a definition of nonsensical argument then.

The argument was that Danny was misused yet you just argued they are running the same plays as we were. So misused in one instance and yet not misused in another?

Now just let that marinate for a minute then try to cook up that arguement again.

Now I buy the fact that maybe Danny just wasn't ready for the minutes yet which is totally fair but to say that he was misused? Sorry I think that argument stinks to high heaven.

NaptownSeth,

The Danny trade wasn't just about this year. If Lance walks then a replacement was needed and having one on the roster makes sense not just for a insurance policy but also as a way to get a player outside of using the MLE.

Re: Granger - Turner

Does any one on this thread really see Turner as being a $9 million plus player. If you had a choice of Turner's 8.7m offer or 10m to Lance, which would you go for? Do we really see ET as a replacement for Lance for next season?

Re: Granger - Turner

Pacers took a shot and so far it hasn't panned out quite as well as they hoped. We needed more from Granger then just to be Paul George's babysitter. So yes, based on those numbers, do you make the trade? Probably not, but successful individuals, teams, etc. have to take risks sometimes. The wheels on this wagon were coming off way before the trade was made. I think Larry saw that and that was some of his incentive for even making the move.

Re: Granger - Turner

Does any one on this thread really see Turner as being a $9 million plus player. If you had a choice of Turner's 8.7m offer or 10m to Lance, which would you go for? Do we really see ET as a replacement for Lance for next season?

I like Turner, but he doesn't make anyone else better nor does he rebound the ball like Lance. No question Lance> Evan and I even like Evan.

Re: Granger - Turner

The production similarity is damning because it was supposed to be better. They didn't risk chemistry and fanbase issues for "exactly the same". If the production is a matter of the situation then you just keep Granger because he can defend the post better than Paul and is twice the defender ET is, and you live with the offensive numbers.

For the ET deal to be a success his production, especially scoring, must be a substantial improvement. So far the 2 "swing for the fence" deals have gone tilt.

I do like that ET has had the better FG% but it really sucks not having the 3pt threat. The issue was that DG hadn't gotten dialed in from 3 either.

I was never high on the trade, but I am a little surprised how ineffective ET has been. I did expect more. He is producing about as much as Granger was and after 20 games or so I knew Granger wasn't going to blow up but I did think he still had a good shot at improving a bit as the season wore on. The trade at this stage looks like a mistake chemistry wise, but with some time it might just be a wash.

Re: Granger - Turner

Does any one on this thread really see Turner as being a $9 million plus player. If you had a choice of Turner's 8.7m offer or 10m to Lance, which would you go for? Do we really see ET as a replacement for Lance for next season?

Re: Granger - Turner

The argument was that Danny was misused yet you just argued they are running the same plays as we were. So misused in one instance and yet not misused in another?

Now just let that marinate for a minute then try to cook up that arguement again.

Now I buy the fact that maybe Danny just wasn't ready for the minutes yet which is totally fair but to say that he was misused? Sorry I think that argument stinks to high heaven.

NaptownSeth,

The Danny trade wasn't just about this year. If Lance walks then a replacement was needed and having one on the roster makes sense not just for a insurance policy but also as a way to get a player outside of using the MLE.

The only thing I could agree with you on here is your last statement regarding the insurance policy. Danny was completely misused in our offense here as Turner was for the first 10 games or so. In L.A. Danny gets the ball when he's open with time on the clock not as a last second bailout with 2 tenths of a second left on the clock. Danny often gets the chance to be the focal point of the offense while he's on the floor there. Here he never had that chance since Lance decided he was the focal point and was usually on the court while Danny was.

Re: Granger - Turner

This will go down as the trade that killed the the Indiana Pacers title run. Screw you Larry.

There are a lot of reasons that this team has plummeted but I have to say that this certainly stands out as the one thing I can point to and say, there if we had done that differently the team would not be in the free fall it is in.

Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

Re: Granger - Turner

This will go down as the trade that killed the the Indiana Pacers title run. Screw you Larry.

a team tthat gets the feelings hurt over a trade of a vet player not returning next season wasn't going to beat the LeBron james led Miami heat anyways. Pacers are trying to beat the Heat which is no easy task.

so he added Bynum, ET, Lavoy Allen for essentially a vet that hasn't contributed to this team much in the last two years.

******** delusional. he sells out the Fieldhouse and saves this Franchise from moving to Vegas and this is the thanks he gets.

yall are crazy cursing Bird. its one thing yall allow this team to use it as a sorry *** soft excuse now the fanbase does the same.

yupppp lets crucify LEGEND send his *** back to French Lick .... look forward to the good seats that will be available at the Fieldhouse cause that's the only silver lining were gonna see for a long time.

Re: Granger - Turner

a team tthat gets the feelings hurt over a trade of a vet player not returning next season wasn't going to beat the LeBron james led Miami heat anyways. Pacers are trying to beat the Heat which is no easy task.

so he added Bynum, ET, Lavoy Allen for essentially a vet that hasn't contributed to this team much in the last two years.

******** delusional. he sells out the Fieldhouse and saves this Franchise from moving to Vegas and this is the thanks he gets.

yall are crazy cursing Bird. its one thing yall allow this team to use it as a sorry *** soft excuse now the fanbase does the same.

yupppp lets crucify LEGEND send his *** back to French Lick .... look forward to the good seats that will be available at the Fieldhouse cause that's the only silver lining were gonna see for a long time.

Turner won't work here as long as Vogel is coach. Turner had 21 in the last game because he was not on the floor at the same time as Lance. And was able to be a playmaker and scorer. Our coach is inept at using talent, and scheming for the talent to be most effective period.

Re: Granger - Turner

a team tthat gets the feelings hurt over a trade of a vet player not returning next season wasn't going to beat the LeBron james led Miami heat anyways. Pacers are trying to beat the Heat which is no easy task.

so he added Bynum, ET, Lavoy Allen for essentially a vet that hasn't contributed to this team much in the last two years.

******** delusional. he sells out the Fieldhouse and saves this Franchise from moving to Vegas and this is the thanks he gets.

yall are crazy cursing Bird. its one thing yall allow this team to use it as a sorry *** soft excuse now the fanbase does the same.

yupppp lets crucify LEGEND send his *** back to French Lick .... look forward to the good seats that will be available at the Fieldhouse cause that's the only silver lining were gonna see for a long time.

It doesnt really matter at this point if the guys should or should not be upset about the trading of Granger, but at this point it is IMO indisputable that they have not been able to get over it... So, yes Bird deserves to wear this... When they guys say that they dont want to make any moves but he goes ahead and does so anyways... He absolutely deserves to wear it... When people chastize Roy for signing an offer from Portland siting loyalty yada yada but give Bird a pass for rewarding a guy who was a "good soldier" by trading him to the laughing stock of the league... He better wear it... When he disrupts what was reported as a very strong locker room... He will wear it...